It's not that I don't understand the right for the accused to face their accuser in a court of law. I get that sometimes- a victim is going to be required to testify as to what happened to them. It's part of the entire "right to a fair trial" issue. I understand it- I just don't always like it.
Now, in defense of defense attorneys- most tend to tread lightly when it comes to questioning a child about an allegation of abuse. Most, but not all. They tend to understand the emotional trauma that a child endures while testifying, and a good lawyer will remain mindful of that while still attempting to give their client the best representation as possible.
It's not always that way. Sometimes, a defense lawyer will go above and beyond what is needed to present a "reason of doubt". And, even worse- sometimes the accused represents themselves.
Self representation is a legal, and important option to many people. Some feel that they can better present their side than a third party. While there may seem to be a plus side to representing oneself in court, there are often a like of cons- which can out weigh any benefiting factors.
Lawyers normally have more experience in the court room, they are trained in discerning the law, and they naturally have a better chance at winning the case than someone unfamiliar with the judicial process. I'm personally one that believe that if you have a job that needs done, you are best off finding someone who does that job for a living- otherwise you have no one to blame but yourself when it gets screwed up.
Howard Thompson III of South Carolina is one of the many people who make the choice to represent themselves every day. But he's not handling his case alone, he has a legal advisor working with him on his case.
The issue is that Thompson is accused of molesting a 6 year old boy he babysat for more than fifty times. The boy had been left at his apartment, and when the mother returned to get him, she found Thompson in the bathroom with her son, who was nude. Thompson is also charged with sexually abusing a 13 year old neighbor.
With Thompson representing himself, it makes it very difficult for the child to testify. Let's face it- adults have a hard time looking into the eyes of their perp and recounting the abuse suffered at their hands... it's no question that a small child would be in a even more fragile state, and even more open to emotional distress at facing their abuser.
I applaud these parents, they've have to make a tough choice which could effect the outcome of the trial. My heart goes out to them, and I hope for their sake and their sons that a conviction is given in this case.
It does however remind me just how much I wish there were limits to the "self representation" laws. I don't believe that a accused child molester should be allowed to limit the prosecution's case by putting them in a situation where if the child testifies- then the accused can personally question them. In cases like these, where it seems the only thing holding the child back is some monster defending himself- there should be an allowance to bring in a "professional" and do the questioning via them.
Sometimes, we make it to damn easy on these sick monsters.
Now, in defense of defense attorneys- most tend to tread lightly when it comes to questioning a child about an allegation of abuse. Most, but not all. They tend to understand the emotional trauma that a child endures while testifying, and a good lawyer will remain mindful of that while still attempting to give their client the best representation as possible.
It's not always that way. Sometimes, a defense lawyer will go above and beyond what is needed to present a "reason of doubt". And, even worse- sometimes the accused represents themselves.
Self representation is a legal, and important option to many people. Some feel that they can better present their side than a third party. While there may seem to be a plus side to representing oneself in court, there are often a like of cons- which can out weigh any benefiting factors.
Lawyers normally have more experience in the court room, they are trained in discerning the law, and they naturally have a better chance at winning the case than someone unfamiliar with the judicial process. I'm personally one that believe that if you have a job that needs done, you are best off finding someone who does that job for a living- otherwise you have no one to blame but yourself when it gets screwed up.
Howard Thompson III of South Carolina is one of the many people who make the choice to represent themselves every day. But he's not handling his case alone, he has a legal advisor working with him on his case.
The issue is that Thompson is accused of molesting a 6 year old boy he babysat for more than fifty times. The boy had been left at his apartment, and when the mother returned to get him, she found Thompson in the bathroom with her son, who was nude. Thompson is also charged with sexually abusing a 13 year old neighbor.
With Thompson representing himself, it makes it very difficult for the child to testify. Let's face it- adults have a hard time looking into the eyes of their perp and recounting the abuse suffered at their hands... it's no question that a small child would be in a even more fragile state, and even more open to emotional distress at facing their abuser.
The parents who say their son was molested two years ago said they won't let him testify at trial because the accused molester is representing himself and would end up cross-examining the child.
[...]
The 6-year-old's father said, "At the preliminary hearing, part of the confession was read. He confessed to assaulting my son more than 50 times. And had we not discovered it, there's no telling how many more times it could have happened."
"I'm worried about it. (I) want to make sure they get a conviction. I want to make sure justice is served and he is punished for what he has done and protect other children in the future so it does not happen again," he said.
I applaud these parents, they've have to make a tough choice which could effect the outcome of the trial. My heart goes out to them, and I hope for their sake and their sons that a conviction is given in this case.
It does however remind me just how much I wish there were limits to the "self representation" laws. I don't believe that a accused child molester should be allowed to limit the prosecution's case by putting them in a situation where if the child testifies- then the accused can personally question them. In cases like these, where it seems the only thing holding the child back is some monster defending himself- there should be an allowance to bring in a "professional" and do the questioning via them.
Sometimes, we make it to damn easy on these sick monsters.